Japan's lack of remorse troubling as it manoeuvres to rearm

June 19 2003

Tokyo's bid to bolster its military presence has stirred up the ghosts of World War II, writes Shane Green.

Avisit to the museum next to Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine is a confronting experience. Japan's war of aggression through Asia and the threat to Australia was an unchallenged fact of recent history with which many of us were raised.

At the Yasukuni museum, there is a different story. Rather than a war of aggression, the march of imperial Japan is portrayed as an act of self-defence.

Yasukuni - meaning peaceful country - is the spiritual home of Japan's nationalists. The shrine honours all of Japan's war dead, but most significantly, 14 of Japan's A-class war criminals, including the wartime prime minister, Hideki Tojo.

Since he was elected in 2001, Japan's Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi, has made the pilgrimage to Yasukuni three times. For countries once conquered by Japan, these visits are deeply disturbing. They reinforce that, unlike Germany, Japan has yet to offer a full apology for its actions, and demonstrate true remorse, almost 50 years since its surrender.

This has been a source of constant friction in the region. Add to Yasukuni the treatment of the "comfort women", textbooks that whitewash Japan's wartime actions, and the regular failure of Japanese courts to hold Japan accountable. ");document.write("

advertisement

");
}
}
// -->

This lack of real contrition has now assumed an even greater importance. Faced with the threat of North Korean missiles - conventional and possibly nuclear - Japan is shedding its pacifist robes, assuming its most aggressive defence posture since 1945.

Tokyo now talks about its right to launch pre-emptive strikes; Koizumi wants the pointedly named Self Defence Forces - a potent force of 240,000 - to be called the "army"; and the Diet, Japan's national parliament, has just passed war contingency laws that for three decades failed to win support.

All of this is being done under Article Nine of a constitution that prohibits war, imposed by the US to counter a military resurgence.

For years, revising Article Nine has been an issue, and a nascent debate is running. But what the past few months have reinforced is that governments can still take wide-ranging action under the banner of self-defence. There are two starting points for assessing what this means.

First, Japan is facing a genuine threat. North Korea has 100 Rodong missiles pointed at the archipelago, and any country has the right to ensure its own protection.

Second, the Japan of today is not the Japan of the 1930s. It has been shaped by its defeat and the influence of what was the seemingly inviolate Article Nine. As a pacifist nation, it has risen to become the second largest economy in the world.

In this environment, a repeat of an expansionist Japan of the 1930s and 1940s appears ludicrous.

Under the security alliance with Washington, Japan plays a critical role as a base for US forward deployed forces, and relies on the US nuclear umbrella for protection. The US is encouraging Tokyo to sign up for the Missile Defence System - an increasingly likely prospect because of the North Korean threat.

Washington has also urged Tokyo to "get out of the stands" on Iraq, and commit troops to logistical support roles, but who will almost certainly be caught up in conflict. Koizumi has just extended the Diet session to get the authorising legislation passed.

The question that the US will eventually have to confront is just how far it wants Japan to go. At some point, US leaders will also have to deal with the same issue that troubles Japan's neighbours - lack of genuine remorse.

Washington also knows that it has been partly responsible. As has been argued by many others, the decision to maintain Emperor Hirohito on the throne had a profound influence on the nation's psyche.

As the divine emperor, Hirohito was at the centre of Japan's imperialist drive. Yet he was not only excused by the US, he did not stand trial as a war criminal and his image was recast as a benign witness to history. This thinking influenced a nation and has made the process of confronting the past that much more difficult.

Should we worry about Japan's new defence posture? Probably not. But as long as Japanese prime ministers continue to make visits to Yasukuni, it is an assurance that must be qualified.